DDSXTY — Unclear member names when programming language doesn’t support typedef

Summary:
In the IDL definitions for the specification section Representing Types with TypeObject, some members of type MemberId are named simply member, and some members of type TypeId are named simply type. The fact that the integral types of these members represent IDs is clear to readers of the IDL or to readers of generated code in languages that support typedef (such as C), because the type name is explicit. However, in Java and other programming languages that do not support typedef, the types of these members degrades to simply int (or another built-in integral type). This type obscures the meanings of the members.
Resolution:
Name the members in question more explicitly: member_id and type_id.
Revised Text:
Rename the following type members in the IDL file:
• AnnotationUsageMember::member ? AnnotationUsageMember::member_id
• AnnotationUsage::type ? AnnotationUsage::type_id
• TypeProperty::id ? TypeProperty::type_id
• MemberProperty::id ? MemberProperty::member_id
• MemberProperty::type ? MemberProperty::type_id

Name the members in question more explicitly: member_id and type_id.